Whether approved for reporting?¹Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes

Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge

Petitioner, invoking provisions of Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has filed the present Writ Petition praying for H following substantive reliefs:-

“i That this Hon'ble Court may kindly issue a writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ of similar nature, thereby quashing the provision of section 6, 7 and 8 of THE HIMACHAL PRADESH RECRUITMENT AND CONDITIONS OF SERVICE OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES ACT, 2024 being unconstitutional, arbitrary and against the principal of natural justice.

ii. That this Hon'ble Court may kindly issue a writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ of similar nature, thereby quashing the office order No. HFW-H(I)B(6)143/91 (Court Case) dated 25-03-2025 ANNEXURE P-12 whereby the representation of the petitioner was rejected.

iii. That this Hon'ble Court may kindly issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ of similar nature, directing the respondent department to regularize the service of the petitioner as Staff Nurse from the date petitioner was initially appointed on the said post on contractual basis in the month of January 2006, along with all the consequential and financial benefits.

iv. That the seniority list, if drawn by the respondent state under the provision of act abid and in contraventions or against the rights of the petitioner may kindly be declared nullity.

v. That the respondent may kindly be directed to consider the case of the petitioner in terms of the law laid down by this Hon'ble Court in a time bound manner.”

2. Claim of the petitioner has been rejected by the respondents on the basis of enactment of Himachal Pradesh Recruitment and Condoitions of Service of Government Employees Act, 2024 (Act No. 23 of 2025), vide Order dated 25.03.2025 (Annexure P-12) issued by Director Health Services, Himachal Pradesh.

3. Admittedly, main issue involved in present petition with grespect to validity, legality and constitutionality of Himachal Pradesh Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Government Employees Act, 2024 (Act No. 23 of 2025) (in short ‘Govt. Employees Act’/the Act/the impugned Act’) has been adjudicated and decided vide judgment dated 25.04.2026 passed in CWP No.3361 of 2025 titled as ‘Devinder Kumar & others vs State of H.P and others connected matters’, wherein, it has been observed as under:-

“2. In all these petitions, the petitioners are mainly aggrieved by the enactment of the Himachal Pradesh Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Government Employees Act, 2024 (Act No. 23 of 2025) (in short ‘Govt. Employees Act/the Act/the impugned Act’).

3. In this common judgment, we are adjudicating onlyP the constitutionality, validity, and legality of the Govt. Employee Act. For other reliefs, the consequences shall follow accordingly, and in case any further relief(s) is/are required to be determined after adjudication of additional facts, not discussed or adjudicated orH covered in this judgment, the petitioners shall be at liberty to avail appropriate remedies, including the filing of fresh petitions for redressal of grievance based on such other issues raised or not raised in these petitions.

…… …… …… …...

202. Accordingly, in view of above discussion and considering the ratio of law laid down by the Apex Court, the impugned Act is quashed and set aside.

203. In view of quashing of the impugned Act, all consequential action, omission aund commission of the respondents-State and its functionaries, based on the impugned Act, are declared illegal